This is what's wrong with politics today. Nobody reads between the lines in communication; everyone is a literalist. I fear for what the next generation of politicians are going to be like. Because it won't be better than what we have now, that's for sure.

MR. BROKAW: ...talking about the energy plan. And then we read in The Wall Street Journal that you and your husband have made a substantial investment in the plan that T. Boone Pickens has put forward, which has a heavy emphasis on natural gas as well.

REP. PELOSI: But let me see if you call substantial 03 three percent of our investments.

MR. BROKAW: Oh, it's what, between 100 and $200,000.

REP. PELOSI: No, no, it was between 50 and $100,000, and it's part of an, you know, entrepreneurial package. This is the package we sign up for, this is what they invest in. But that's not the point. I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

MR. BROKAW: But you're also in a position to influence where the emphasis will be in where we're moving.

REP. PELOSI: Well, that's not--that is, that is the marketplace. The fact is, the supply of natural gas is so big, and you do need a transition if you're going to go from fossil fuels, as you say, you can't do it overnight, but you must transition. These investments in wind, in solar and biofuels and focus on natural gas, these are the real alternatives. You have to ask yourself why, why is the administration not doing this? This is the challenge of our generation. It's a national security issue. President Nixon said we must end our dependence on foreign oil. President Carter said it's a moral equivalent of war. It's a national security issue, it's an economic issue, it's an environmental health issue, and it is a moral issue to protect this environment.

Conniving coont. Try and convince me she's not enriching herself with T Boone Pickens at the expense of the American people. She has Congressional control to direct land grabs, water rights and public money to her new business partner. Remember kids, on Jan 1st trillions in alternative energy investment incentives expire all across the land. Pelosi and Pickens doesn't want any competition on alternative development.

Does America really want to just exchange energy tyrants? Or would we rather invest in technology that makes each of us independent with energy?

GaryPDX:Conniving coont. Try and convince me she's not enriching herself with T Boone Pickens at the expense of the American people. She has Congressional control to direct land grabs, water rights and public money to her new business partner. Remember kids, on Jan 1st trillions in alternative energy investment incentives expire all across the land. Pelosi and Pickens doesn't want any competition on alternative development.

Does America really want to just exchange energy tyrants? Or would we rather invest in technology that makes each of us independent with energy?

This is what's wrong with politics today. Nobody reads between the lines in communication; everyone is a literalist. I fear for what the next generation of politicians are going to be like. Because it won't be better than what we have now, that's for sure.

this. I am not sure about the actual viability of biogas, but its clear that this was the sort of alternative she was speaking to.

REP. PELOSI: No, no, it was between 50 and $100,000, and it's part of an, you know, entrepreneurial package. This is the package we sign up for, this is what they invest in. But that's not the point. I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

GaryPDX:REP. PELOSI: No, no, it was between 50 and $100,000, and it's part of an, you know, entrepreneurial package. This is the package we sign up for, this is what they invest in. But that's not the point. I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

Nestea Plunge:GaryPDX: REP. PELOSI: No, no, it was between 50 and $100,000, and it's part of an, you know, entrepreneurial package. This is the package we sign up for, this is what they invest in. But that's not the point. I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

Only if you reduce a clear conflict of interest by someone with the power to influence the country's energy policy and potentially reap an untold fortune through a business venture that stands to benefit directly from said policy, then, yes, yes it is a meme. I guess we can reduce it to the level of meaningless campaign jargon, like "drain the swamp." Can't really remember who said that one, though...

Nestea Plunge:GaryPDX: REP. PELOSI: No, no, it was between 50 and $100,000, and it's part of an, you know, entrepreneurial package. This is the package we sign up for, this is what they invest in. But that's not the point. I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

Funny part is, I know that all the righties who will jump all over her for leaving out "traditional" before "fossil fuels" are the same ones that actually think "offshore drilling" is a sound energy policy. And the irony of this will sail right over their dense little skulls.

At least she ACKNOWLEDGES that there alternative energy sources, you twits. But you just keep on backing the GOP and their ongoing plan to financially and ethically bankrupt all of Western society. See how that works out for ya.

MaxxLarge:Funny part is, I know that all the righties who will jump all over her for leaving out "traditional" before "fossil fuels" are the same ones that actually think "offshore drilling" is a sound energy policy. And the irony of this will sail right over their dense little skulls.

At least she ACKNOWLEDGES that there alternative energy sources, you twits. But you just keep on backing the GOP and their ongoing plan to financially and ethically bankrupt all of Western society. See how that works out for ya.

Offshore drilling and exploration of alternative energy sources aren't mutually exclusive concepts. Offshore drilling is but a minor facet of an overall energy policy. It's not going to fix the problem long term, and anyone saying that is either wildly optimistic or simply wrong. If, however, a lift on the ban is made part of a more comprehensive policy geared towards ultimate energy independence and more varied sources and can help alleviate some of the cost to consumers during the years it will take to make that transition, then what, may I ask, is so awful about allowing states to determine for themselves whether or not to allow offshore drilling?

Obdicut:Yeah, well, that was pretty stupid. I get what she meant, but...

Pelosi is pretty damn stupid on energy policy. She really hasn't helped us out in California with our many woes on that issue. She never seems to focus on anything remotely practical.

Natural gas is a great energy source, though.

I like natural gas. I'm looking at a system that will power my current house all on natural gas, including electricity. Wait until Jan 1st when all the solar and wind projects that aren't complete start shutting down because of the incentive expirations. We have 19 commercial solar and wind projects in Oregon at risk of shutting down that's to Pelosi. Twenty percent of all those investments is BIG money. Look around, all the current project are in high gear to complete by the end of the year.

GaryPDX:I like natural gas. I'm looking at a system that will power my current house all on natural gas, including electricity. Wait until Jan 1st when all the solar and wind projects that aren't complete start shutting down because of the incentive expirations. We have 19 commercial solar and wind projects in Oregon at risk of shutting down that's to Pelosi. Twenty percent of all those investments is BIG money. Look around, all the current project are in high gear to complete by the end of the year.

Uh, no, but whatever.

Kudos to you for trying to switch to natural gas. Pay attention to what those MIT guys just did as well.

I've been trying (and failing) to convince the morons I go to college with that diving headfirst into corn ethanol would produce a Corn Lobby as powerful and -eventually- as evil as the Oil Lobby. Just because we'd be getting reamed domestically, they don't seem to grasp it.

MR. BROKAW: But you're also in a position to influence where the emphasis will be in where we're moving.

REP. PELOSI: Well, that's not--that is, that is the marketplace. The fact is, the supply of natural gas is so big, and you do need a transition if you're going to go from fossil fuels, as you say, you can't do it overnight, but you must transition. These investments in wind, in solar and biofuels and focus on natural gas, these are the real alternatives. You have to ask yourself why, why is the administration not doing this? This is the challenge of our generation. It's a national security issue. President Nixon said we must end our dependence on foreign oil. President Carter said it's a moral equivalent of war. It's a national security issue, it's an economic issue, it's an environmental health issue, and it is a moral issue to protect this environment.

What a total farking dodge -- just be straight Nancypants and say "yes, I do influence the direction."

Humean_Nature:GaryPDX: Does America really want to just exchange energy tyrants?

I've been trying (and failing) to convince the morons I go to college with that diving headfirst into corn ethanol would produce a Corn Lobby as powerful and -eventually- as evil as the Oil Lobby. Just because we'd be getting reamed domestically, they don't seem to grasp it.

Ya..I know. On the ethanol situation, corn is a transitional stock. Once they get rolling with cellulose methods, we'll move away from food stocks. AND a 54 cents per gallon tariff on imported Brazilian ethanol makes NO sense at all. They are swimming in it.

If people aren't careful, we'll see ExxonMobile marginalized by the Pelosi-Pickens energy cabal.

Obdicut:GaryPDX: I like natural gas. I'm looking at a system that will power my current house all on natural gas, including electricity. Wait until Jan 1st when all the solar and wind projects that aren't complete start shutting down because of the incentive expirations. We have 19 commercial solar and wind projects in Oregon at risk of shutting down that's to Pelosi. Twenty percent of all those investments is BIG money. Look around, all the current project are in high gear to complete by the end of the year.

Uh, no, but whatever.

Kudos to you for trying to switch to natural gas. Pay attention to what those MIT guys just did as well.

I've been watching micro turbines..they need to get just a little smaller. Currently, it's easy enough to convert a small gas engine to NG and spin alternators for electricity.

And what do you mean "uh, no" on the alternative energy expirations? That's a hard fact scheduled to expire Jan 1st. Any project not complete by that date will lose 20% of the investment to the government. Every project in Oregon is in high gear to complete construction.

Skleenar:So, if it is a conflict of interest for congressmen to have investments, why is it such a scandal that Joe Biden is worth so little?

No, it's not, but she does have influence over energy policy, she does appear to have a stake in it, and many politicians utilize a blind trust while in office. Even Dick Cheney moved his investments into a blind trust. For people who were screaming (I'm not saying you) about Bush and Cheney's closed door meetings with energy industry insiders when setting their energy policy - and yes, that did look shady - to not be raising some stink about this is rather inconsisitent, to put it politely.

GaryPDX:And what do you mean "uh, no" on the alternative energy expirations? That's a hard fact scheduled to expire Jan 1st. Any project not complete by that date will lose 20% of the investment to the government. Every project in Oregon is in high gear to complete construction.

Nabb1:No, it's not, but she does have influence over energy policy, she does appear to have a stake in it, and many politicians utilize a blind trust while in office. Even Dick Cheney moved his investments into a blind trust. For people who were screaming (I'm not saying you) about Bush and Cheney's closed door meetings with energy industry insiders when setting their energy policy - and yes, that did look shady - to not be raising some stink about this is rather inconsisitent, to put it politely.

I don't necessarily consider this an inconsistency.

I suppose if people who cried foul about the Cheney Task Force thought that the reason it was shady was that Cheney was going to get personally enriched, I suppose it might be.

But there were plenty of other things about those meetings that raised all sorts of flags (like the exploration maps of Iraq, for instance). And the probable reason for concern was more about paying the energy sector back for supporting the Bush/Cheney team than Cheney trying to personally profit off of an Administration energy program.

What you describe as Pelosi's problem is more one of the natural conflict that is inherent in the position of influencing legislation and having investments.

I'm only here to say that if you're angry about Pelosi using her power to make money on specific stocks and you haven't been as angry about Cheney doing the same for the last 7.5 years, you're a partisan dick who is helping to destroy our country.

adiabat:the President and Vice President have all of their investments in Blind trusts.

As in, you're blind and you trust that Cheney has no Halliburton stock options? Even though Senator Lautenberg has done quite a bit of research on the subject and has shown that Cheney's Halliburton stock options alone went up roughly $7m in value in 2005 alone?

By the way, I also think Pelosi should completely forfeit her shares of Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

Flab:I know you like to argue with Gary, but 1 Google and 3 clicks was all it took.

Okay-- but what I was saying "no" to was that those expirations, if they do occurr-- which I do not believe they will-- are not Pelosi's fault. The GOP and the White House have been the main force working against those-- pinning their expiration on Pelosi is just... strange.

As long as the white house and the GOP withdraw their objections, which I think they will, those credits will be renewed.

Obdicut:GaryPDX: And what do you mean "uh, no" on the alternative energy expirations? That's a hard fact scheduled to expire Jan 1st. Any project not complete by that date will lose 20% of the investment to the government. Every project in Oregon is in high gear to complete construction.

There are also aspects that hit all the consumer "Energy Star" and Energy Efficient product purchases like home solar panels, energy efficient furnaces and hot water heaters. In the commercial scale it amounts to 20% of the entire investment in tax incentives, solar and wind projects. End date Dec 31st, 2008. Sealed when Nancy tabled the 09 budget a couple months ago. The clock is ticking.

gustakooka:Nestea Plunge: GaryPDX: REP. PELOSI: No, no, it was between 50 and $100,000, and it's part of an, you know, entrepreneurial package. This is the package we sign up for, this is what they invest in. But that's not the point. I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

All I know is that I don't want an economic policy from the woman who couldn't sell a dozen copies of her own book...despite being the highest female elected official in the history of the United States.